There has been a lot of attention and scrutiny to flight tracking maps in the last few days, so we've made some great improvements to improve visualization and have a few updates to help everyone understand what they're seeing and how the data is derived. (flightaware.com) Plus d'info...

" Our last position was at 13:20 UTC (9:20 EDT) just West of the Eastern border of Ukraine (48.135, 38.503) and the flight was cruising normally at 33,000 feet. This part of the world has limited coverage for us, so gaps of minutes or even an hour are not uncommon. I attached a flight tracking map with the green line depicting the route flown. "

and the same story showing a link from the 16th, with almost ZERO True Location Data at all, but still part of the original story links: (almost all of the track is GRAY)

Here was your explanation about the capabilities of FA when asked about your precision and accuracy of tracking flights:

(8:39):

"On (OUR) website you can see typically (ABOUT three or four positions a minute (…UH…) that allows us to draw a (REALLY NICE,) smooth map that shows an accurate flight track.

However, (WE UH) sometimes we have up to three or four positions (PER) second that is not available on the website."

Didn't you tell the Bloomberg Reports this when they were SPECIFICALLY asking you about FLIGHT MH17? On the 18th of July, 2014, right? Were you providing the 6 plus HOUR GAP information to the "investigators and the government" that you guys are NOW reporting, since Midday Monday this week, the 21st of JULY 2014, under your "revised" "Map Behavior",

More importantly, how is it possible that on the 18th, in your interview with Bloomberg, at about 13:29, didn't the female reporter ask you:

"HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE FLIGHT PATH OF MH17 OVER THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS AND MONTHS, AND AND HOW DIFFERENT YE-YESTERDAY’S FLIGHT PATH, OR SIMILAR IT IT WAS TO THAT?"

And didn't you reply:

"YEAH, WE’VE LOOKED AT IT AND WE SEE VERY SIMILAR FLIGHT PATHS. WE SEE VERY SLIGHT UH DIVERGENCES, <HERE AT 13:46 WE GET A PICTURE OF THE FLIGHT PATHS FROM A MAP>

AND SOME OF THAT IS DUE TO AIRSPACE PARTICULARLY IN EUROPE... WHICH IS VERY COMPLICATED, UH AND THERES A LOT OF CHANGES IN IN HOW AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS WANT FLIGHTS TO BE ROUTED THROUGH EUROPE WHICH IS INCREDIBLY DENSE AIRSPACE, AND BECAUSE THIS FLIGHT ORIGINATED UH RELATIVELY NORTH UH WEST IN EUROPE, IT HAD TO FLY THROUGH A LOT OF EUROPEAN AIRSPACE WHICH MEANS THAT IT COULD UH UH SORT OF ENTER THE UKRAINIAN AREA AT ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT POINTS AND THAT WAS REALLY THE BIGGEST IMPACT THAT WE SAW, UH WAS THAT WHAT POINT IT ENTERED UKRAINE AND THEN WHEN WE SAW UH PRETTY SIMILAR OVERFLIGHTS DAY AFTER DAY UH, NOT JUST WITH MALAYSIAN AIRLINES BUT WITH OTHER CARRIERS AS WELL." (14:21) ?

How is it possible that on the 18th, you can detect "very small divergences" between flights on different days from the same flight number MH17, ESPECIALLY with respect to the flights' position over the UKRAINE, if you actually have nothing but GRAY airspace (estimated) over that entire region as reported on the 21st of July at noon in the "map behavior" article?

How could you possibly know that there were other aircraft "within 100 miles" and maybe even "75 miles" of MH75, if you actually had ZERO visibility, according to your own explanations in your MAP TRACKING DATA, which changed, as far as I can tell on about the 19th or 20th of JULY 2014?

Perhaps MOST importantly, how does all of that jive with your current explanation from the "MAP BEHAVIOR" article still on your site that states: (as of now, 1235am 7 25 2014, anyway):

"Of course, it's still important to understand that THE WHITE LINE REFLECTS A LACK OF DATA, AND YOU CAN'T DRAW ANY CONCLUSIONS FROM IT, since it may suggest that, for example, A FLIGHT FLEW THROUGH A COUNTRY THAT IT REALLY DEVIATED AROUND."

(The caps were my emphasis.) "ANY CONCLUSIONS"?? ARE YOU SURE ABOUT THAT???

You ARE aware, Mr. Baker, of these stated limitations in your company's reporting of flight data, your bread and butter, right, as of Monday the 21st of july, 2014, in this article quoted just above about "flying AROUND a"(n) (ENTIRE) "COUNTRY." But......because of a "lack of DATA" FA really just doesn't have a clue, for sure. You are aware that that is the message FA is sending to the Community THIS WEEK, right???

What is the VECTOR on your message, Mr. Baker? I'm afraid some of the course deltas could be creating some circulatory problems in your company's collective noggins. You guys might want to look into some G suits for the whole board. Or maybe you can just send a pair of G-Pants to all of us in the Community. I'm getting a little light headed myself.

If you're not aware, Mr. Baker, you might want to go and read that article again for yourself. I had to read it 2 or 3 times myself to keep from believing that I had had some kind of stroke.

Since last week, did you guys LOSE all your "ground stations" or data sources or government cooperation or satellite feeds, that simply erased your ability to "see" in the entire region between western Europe and India, or .......WHAT????

Are you LOSING data streams and sources, or, as you published on MONDAY 7 21 2014 at noon: "We are constantly working to improve our coverage and more data sources are added almost daily."

I figured that maybe this has something to do with this group that you ARE a member of, right?:

What kind of group is that, Mr Baker, and what do you guys do? Maybe this is none of the "business" of the "community" of FA, but if it helps explain all these "changes" or discrepancies or contradictions or whatever they are, I'd sure like to hear it, and I'm pretty sure others would as well. So (PLEASE) don't "down vote" me on this one. By now you guys have got to have figured out that eventually this is all going to be explained, anyway, right?

If it weren't for the fact that these obvious contradictions are being used by powerful people around the world to make arguments about sending our country into a new World War, I probably could keep my sense of humor about it.

Unfortunately, for now, it's not funny, and if you guys think you can continue to bury my questions and pretend no one's paying attention, you might check the search engines. They're starting to warm up and the Oil Pressure is starting to rise, if you know what I mean.

More to the point, by this time next week, I'm pretty sure that virtually every news outlet in the world is going to be talking about this, and if that doesn't happen, I will personally do what it takes to be sure that these questions are asked until they are answered, and we collectively, can regain our altitude and horizon, or at least stop the spinning so we can see where we are, and who's flying this war machine.

If profit is your motive, as a member of your "community" I suggest respectfully that you guys work to regain your credibility. If propaganda is aim, your losing altitude, and quick, in my humble opinion.

You can see why this change happened at http://flightaware.com/news/article/Improvements-to-FlightAware-Maps--Understanding-Map-Behavior/196We are not saying it did not change, please see #1No, This change was made to better understand the information. As mentioned in the link in #1, you can also view the raw data in the track log and graph. This change will now allow you to better visualize the raw data on the map.As mentioned in #3, there was not an outside request to make the change, to my knowledge.I do not understand the question as there is nothing in your email regarding record keeping.As mentioned in #1, this change is to better improve readability of the data and we continually work to improve coverage areas to improve data for the FlightAware community.Collin WhiteFlightAware+1 713 877 9011

I am very sorry for this confusion. This flight actually operates outside of our primary coverage area, so there are certain portions where it displays estimated positions. We originally showed some estimated positions for the flight after the crash, but these have since been removed to ensure that only the live positions displayed.

You can always check the track log & graph for any flight to see which portions of the tracking were displayed in estimated positions and which ones were received from live positions.

Below you will see the post that I made to your website early this morning at about 224am Central Time.

This post represents evidence, now verified by other observers that Flight Track Data has been altered inyour computer system regarding at least one and possibly multiple histories for MAH Flight MH17.

Specifically on the days leading up to the tragic events on 4 17 2014, and specifically on the 14th July 2014:

1. Your site previously reported that the MH17 flight went well south of the Russian / Ukraine Border, flying OVER the Azov Sea, as shown and observed by many commentators, as well as a screen print that I will try to attach along with2. The current version of your report for the flight MH17 on 4 17 2014 NOW HAS CHANGED, and clearly shows the flight flying directly over the 90 degree north to east "corner" of the Territorial Border, which is directly over the war zone.

I will attempt to attach a PDF of the two screen prints, one from Tyler Durden's report (zerohedge dot com) reported by globalresearch dot ca.

I am covering copy of this request to Tyler as well as posting it to several sites in an effort to get this word out. I will relay the message to several journalists, as well as GlobalResearch dot ca, and ensure that your members also see this post, as well as your response.

Questions:

1. Why did this change happen?2. If your position is that it did NOT change (flight track on MH17 for 7 14 2014) please explain why you believe this information is incorrect.3. Did you receive outside requests to alter this information and4. If so, from WHOM?5. Is this typical of your record keeping, and if not, why not?6. If someone did change this information, please explain your plan to continue to maintain the trust you have so clearly earned in the past from all your membership. Please give us ALL the Details.

Is something strange going on at Flight Aware?? Two completely different versions of the track of MH17 on the 14 th of July, for example, seem to be documented. One is the oft quoted version that is on this page, in summary in the graph at the top. That track took the plane on flight MH17 on 7 14 2014 over the sea of Arzov.

There is even a screen print of it in an article from globalresearch.ca, in the Russian version.

Then there is the current version early am central time 7 21 2014. That one shows the plane going directly over the war zone on the 14th.

See the paste that I posed elsewhere with the links. Someone check it out for yourself now, and see if something looks odd, please.

Here's the detail I posted earlier directly on flightaware.com:

1. Someone apparently changed the FA data online for some of flight paths from one day to the next. OR 2. Someone did a really good job of forging a screen print of the Russian version of FA which showed MH17 going far south of the war zone, directly over the sea of Arzov, as reported by many here. Many have commented that for days before the 17th, MH17 always flew outside the war zone. 3. Look at this link and pay attention to the departure and arrival times etc for the 14th of July, and you see FA version of the 14th MH17 flight from a couple of days ago with path Nowhere the border zone:

5. Look yourself....I'm seeing a huge discrepancy on the track of MH17 on the 14th right now at 110am Monday 7 21 2014....do you see it?

What is going on FA??? Who is altering data, you or the authors of the story quoted by globalresearch.ca??

/////////end of post//////

This communication may be unconstitutionally collected and stored by elements of the United States Government or its partners in secret. The parties to this email do not consent to the collection, storage, or retrieval of this communication and any derived metadata, as well as printing, copying, re-transmitting, disseminating, or otherwise using it in a manner prohibited by the Fourth Amendment and the sovereign rights of an individual person. If you believe you have received this communication in error, please delete it immediately.

Mark, you have way too much time on your hands. I personally would appreciate it if you would take your narcissistic diatribes somewhere else. There are many conspiracy theory sites that would embrace you. There is a reason why you are downvoted..."We Don't Care." Go somewhere else to achieve your perceived 15 minutes of fame. Having said this, I will now lean back and await your visceral attack on me.

Each of these is are adjectives (narcissistic, conspiracy (ie: conspiratorial), visceral) followed by nouns (diatribes, theory, attack).

When discussing important ideas, issues or Facts (all nouns), it is more convincing and persuasive to avoid modifiers (adjectives) preceding nouns. The reason for this is simple: modifiers, without supporting FACTS, are by definition, Subjective: (" "subjective" , adj. 1. Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than the object of thought (opposed to "objective") 2. Pertaining to or on the part of an individual; personal; .....3. Placing reliance on one's own moods, attitudes, or OPINIONS"). (Source: Random House College Dictionary, Pg 1308, published1980/ all caps MY emphasis).

You see, and I mean this only as a constructive suggestion, subjective modifiers, without supporting evidence, reduce or even destroy the weight and relevance of an argument to the logical, objective analyst.

Ex: the use of the noun "manure" is sufficient to make the point without adjectives like smelly, steaming, or gag-inducing, which are SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION, OR CHALLENGE. See?

I won't criticize; instead, I mostly will, as has been my intention to ask QUESTIONS TO UNCOVER FACTS:

Why would you suggest that I go somewhere else?

Where better to discuss the FACTS surrounding this tragedy and particularly those data and revisions of data provided by FA than here, on this forum? Who has a more vested interest in the FACTS than THIS "community?"

What, exactly, is it that you "don't care about?"

From what is in your response, the evidence would suggest that FACTS are what you don't "care" about, or am I missing something? Please explain.

Do you know what the invocation of the term "conspiracy theory" indicates about the writer or speaker of the term? Ask any serious investigator or member of the intelligence community, and you will know.

While I appreciate your input and response, and I mean it sincerely, I would never attack you personally. I have no interest in personalities or theories, or UNSUPPORTED opinions (here I used a modifier for clarity. And emphasis).

PLEASE prove me wrong, I would sincerely appreciate and openly engage in any discussion of the FACTS. WILL YOU? That is really ALL I'm asking for: a fact-based discussion and honest, open debate about these important issues.

Yes, Mr. G, I do have time for that. Do you?

BTW, Direct commands, such as : "...Go somewhere else.", could be objectively construed as rude or personal.

Thank you.

MH

PS: in reference to my "time on my hands":

My record: Per FA: since joining this "community" 7 years ago, I have made exactly 11 comments up to now (assuming FA didn't erase, or allow them to (or actively) bury them). This will make #12. http://flightaware.com/user/mdholmes

Your record, per FA: Two years as a member, 124 comments, 7 photos. (Same qualifier for your record, of course) Is that accurate? http://flightaware.com/user/BaronG58

And one more question: do you now or have you ever, directly or indirectly received any compensation, in any form from FA, its managers, board members, current or past, contractors, or govt. agencies which compensate or employ those listed above, including undisclosed intelligence or enforcement entities?

Would you mind answering just that one question, please, if nothing else?

For the record, With regard to that last question, I have not. That is a FACT.

FACT: It's a waste of time to have to scroll past your post to look at the comments I care about.FACT: I really do not care what you have to say.FACT: I downvoted you also so that hopefully the next person won't have to waste 5 extra seconds of their life scrolling past your post.

Dude, the Internet is probably not the best place to be looking for facts. To me Flightaware is almost for entertainment purposes. Sometimes I file an IFR so that people can watch my progress so I guess its useful for that but trying to use it as a source to accurately track a flight for search and rescue purposes probably won't work. Thats what transponders, ELTS, Spidertracks, and SPOTS are for. FYI I voted you down also

Great job! It is a good step to differentiate between what we know and don't know. We will be able to tell which is which, with the addition of seeing where are the gaps in worldwide data.

Am sorry that it took the tragedy of MH17 to focus on what previously was a mostly a trivial issue on data display.

Question on the updates. If you have a flight with sparse reporting data with a position at point A, then a lack of data until a position is reported at point C, is the route posted as the shortest path between A & C or is there some smoothing algorithm used in placing the route line?

So it is a best-guess swag. Not a problem. It's just part of the duck model.The map looks like peaceful tranquil sailing along, like a duck on the water.Underneath there is paddling like H....thanks for the reply.

I use FA mainly to get info on flight arrivals. Useful when one has to head to the airport to receive a family member or friend. Occasionally, have had to cross check Flight Status with the Airline's site. Thank you FA

Concerning the change in track color, may I suggest dashed lines where tracks have weak data. I find the difference between green and white lines to be slight. A dashed line is more intuitive and better serves those with problems interpreting colors and shades.

Would it be possible to add parenthetic time conversions to the departure and arrival times? A subscriber could enter the time zone he/she is in. The program would give the time at departure, say AST, and in parentheses include the subscriber's local time. This added input would only be needed for international flights.

I'm wondering when ADS-B, both In and Out, becomes more commonplace, how that'll affect FlightAware's maps and reporting. I've recently gotten a Stratus 2 for my Arrow, and had my Garmin 330 transponder modified for ADS-B Out. Even though the system is as yet quite nascent, with just a small amount of its potential being utilized, to me it's already a wonderful cockpit tool.

Thanks for the comment, Felix. There's a lot of controversy surrounding ADS-B with respect to its hardware and installation costs. And I can't blame GA pilots in the least; cost in other areas of GA flying are already huge. If you don't have certain, existing equipment in your airplane, installing ADS-B can be a huge, debilitating expense. So there are many facets to it.

Good improvements with the exception of using "hollow white." There isn't that much difference between "hollow white" and the white used to indicate the borders of countries; it doesn't stand out. Why not use international yellow. It would stand out, as lines on a map should, and everyone knows that yellow means caution. In this case: "caution, planned, not actual route; actual route pending receipt of data." Red would also work because everyone know that red mean stop or danger, but yellow seems to be the more logical choice.

Thanks. That makes sense. Am used to seeing cryptic jots that are supposed to represent some esoteric subject. It could also have been posted to the wrong squawk. Let's see if it develops further.namaste

Thanks for all the great feedback here.Gee ...I wounder just how long it will take forthe small airline owner -operators to retrofit theavionics communications when NextGen finally takes over.Little friends below 10,000 Feet AGL could be an issue....

MH17 post correction about changed date and "Map Behavior" See request on specific information that is being asked from management at FA to explain altered map tracks, which need to be explained:

RE: Altered Data on MH17 Flight Tracks on FA: ****IMPORTANT*******

I am posting this again because the link that I posted before did not appear anywhere you could find it....this is the link to the buried story that I can't find anymore without a very significant effort: here is where it was posted before it got buried:

http://flightaware.com/squawks/view/1/recently/popular/43065/newest

if I have received a response from FlightAware, I can't see it in my email.

To All Members of FlightAware:

I am going to post an email that I sent today to FA, as well as the receipt that I got from them right afterwarda....Please PLEASE PLEASE JOIN ME TO GET REAL ANSWERS:

//////////BEGIN EMAIL TO FLIGHTAWARE.COM SENT TO CONTAC@FLIGHTAWARE DOT COM///////

Subject: Flight Aware dot com: Please Explain ASAP!

Monday 931am 7 21 2014

Below you will see the post that I made to your website early this morning atabout 224am Central Time.

This post represents evidence, now verified by other observers that Flight TrackData has been altered inyour computer system regarding at least one and possibly multiple histories forMAH Flight MH17.

Specifically on the days leading up to the tragic events on 4 17 2014, andspecifically on the 14th July 2014:

1. Your site previously reported that the MH17 flight went well south of theRussian / Ukraine Border, flying OVER the Azov Sea, as shown and observed bymany commentators, as well as a screen print that I will try to attach alongwith2. The current version of your report for the flight MH17 on 4 17 2014 NOW HASCHANGED, and clearly shows the flight flying directly over the 90 degree northto east "corner" of the Territorial Border, which is directly over the warzone.

I will attempt to attach a PDF of the two screen prints, one from Tyler Durden'sreport (zerohedge dot com) reported by globalresearch dot ca.

I am covering copy of this request to Tyler as well as posting it to severalsites in an effort to get this word out. I will relay the message to severaljournalists, as well as GlobalResearch dot ca, and ensure that your members alsosee this post, as well as your response.

Questions:

1. Why did this change happen?2. If your position is that it did NOT change (flight track on MH17 for 7 142014) please explain why you believe this information is incorrect.3. Did you receive outside requests to alter this information and4. If so, from WHOM?5. Is this typical of your record keeping, and if not, why not?6. If someone did change this information, please explain your plan to continueto maintain the trust you have so clearly earned in the past from all yourmembership. Please give us ALL the Details.

Is something strange going on at Flight Aware?? Two completely differentversions of the track of MH17 on the 14 th of July, for example, seem to bedocumented. One is the oft quoted version that is on this page, in summary inthe graph at the top. That track took the plane on flight MH17 on 7 14 2014 overthe sea of Arzov.

There is even a screen print of it in an article from globalresearch.ca, in theRussian version.

Then there is the current version early am central time 7 21 2014. That oneshows the plane going directly over the war zone on the 14th.

See the paste that I posed elsewhere with the links. Someone check it out foryourself now, and see if something looks odd, please.

Here's the detail I posted earlier directly on flightaware.com:

1. Someone apparently changed the FA data online for some of flight paths fromone day to the next. OR2. Someone did a really good job of forging a screen print of the Russianversion of FA which showed MH17 going far south of the war zone, directly overthe sea of Arzov, as reported by many here. Many have commented that for daysbefore the 17th, MH17 always flew outside the war zone.3. Look at this link and pay attention to the departure and arrival times etcfor the 14th of July, and you see FA version of the 14th MH17 flight from acouple of days ago with path Nowhere the border zone:

5. Look yourself....I'm seeing a huge discrepancy on the track of MH17 on the14th right now at 110am Monday 7 21 2014....do you see it?

What is going on FA??? Who is altering data, you or the authors of the storyquoted by globalresearch.ca??

/////////end of post//////

This communication may be unconstitutionally collected and stored by elements ofthe United States Government or its partners in secret. The parties to thisemail do not consent to the collection, storage, or retrieval of thiscommunication and any derived metadata, as well as printing, copying,re-transmitting, disseminating, or otherwise using it in a manner prohibited bythe Fourth Amendment and the sovereign rights of an individual person. If youbelieve you have received this communication in error, please delete itimmediately.

Your request (#28968) has been received and is being reviewed by our support staff.

To add additional comments, reply to this email or click the link below:https://support.flightaware.com/requests/28968

Holmesmd

Holmesmd

Jul 21 10:20 AM

Subject: Flight Aware dot com: Please Explain ASAP!

Monday 931am 7 21 2014

Below you will see the post that I made to your website early this morning at about 224am Central Time.

This post represents evidence, now verified by other observers that Flight Track Data has been altered inyour computer system regarding at least one and possibly multiple histories for MAH Flight MH17.

Specifically on the days leading up to the tragic events on 4 17 2014, and specifically on the 14th July 2014:

1. Your site previously reported that the MH17 flight went well south of the Russian / Ukraine Border, flying OVER the Azov Sea, as shown and observed by many commentators, as well as a screen print that I will try to attach along with2. The current version of your report for the flight MH17 on 4 17 2014 NOW HAS CHANGED, and clearly shows the flight flying directly over the 90 degree north to east "corner" of the Territorial Border, which is directly over the war zone.

I will attempt to attach a PDF of the two screen prints, one from Tyler Durden's report (zerohedge dot com) reported by globalresearch dot ca.

I am covering copy of this request to Tyler as well as posting it to several sites in an effort to get this word out. I will relay the message to several journalists, as well as GlobalResearch dot ca, and ensure that your members also see this post, as well as your response.

Questions:

1. Why did this change happen?2. If your position is that it did NOT change (flight track on MH17 for 7 14 2014) please explain why you believe this information is incorrect.3. Did you receive outside requests to alter this information and4. If so, from WHOM?5. Is this typical of your record keeping, and if not, why not?6. If someone did change this information, please explain your plan to continue to maintain the trust you have so clearly earned in the past from all your membership. Please give us ALL the Details.

Is something strange going on at Flight Aware?? Two completely differentversions of the track of MH17 on the 14 th of July, for example, seem to bedocumented. One is the oft quoted version that is on this page, in summary inthe graph at the top. That track took the plane on flight MH17 on 7 14 2014 overthe sea of Arzov.

There is even a screen print of it in an article from globalresearch.ca, in theRussian version.

Then there is the current version early am central time 7 21 2014. That oneshows the plane going directly over the war zone on the 14th.

See the paste that I posed elsewhere with the links. Someone check it out foryourself now, and see if something looks odd, please.

Here's the detail I posted earlier directly on flightaware.com:

1. Someone apparently changed the FA data online for some of flight paths fromone day to the next. OR2. Someone did a really good job of forging a screen print of the Russianversion of FA which showed MH17 going far south of the war zone, directly overthe sea of Arzov, as reported by many here. Many have commented that for daysbefore the 17th, MH17 always flew outside the war zone.3. Look at this link and pay attention to the departure and arrival times etcfor the 14th of July, and you see FA version of the 14th MH17 flight from acouple of days ago with path Nowhere the border zone:

5. Look yourself....I'm seeing a huge discrepancy on the track of MH17 on the14th right now at 110am Monday 7 21 2014....do you see it?

What is going on FA??? Who is altering data, you or the authors of the storyquoted by globalresearch.ca??

/////////end of post//////

This communication may be unconstitutionally collected and stored by elements of the United States Government or its partners in secret. The parties to this email do not consent to the collection, storage, or retrieval of this communication and any derived metadata, as well as printing, copying, re-transmitting, disseminating, or otherwise using it in a manner prohibited by the Fourth Amendment and the sovereign rights of an individual person. If you believe you have received this communication in error, please delete it immediately.

Attachment(s)email to flight aware dot com july 21 2014 1005am central.pdfThis email is a service from FlightAware.Message-Id:8VS0YHSD_53cd2fc137fc5_2b4a3f8d220b332884282_sprut

Dude, lighten up! They're doing the best they can. F.A. is a BUSINESS that provides information to its customers. If you can't grasp the complexities of what they're trying to do with the information they have, then go somewhere else. Geeeeez....

Joel, I sincerely appreciate your comments if you ar suggesting that I didn't post something like that and I have no IDEA what that is referring to, nor have I, nor would I ever post anything like you described.

In any case, I just wish I could figure out:

1. Why all my comments about changes in factual data reports on flight aware have been "down voted" or removed or buried so they can't be found on this site without extraordinary efforts. 2. What is the problem with asking questions?3. Why has No One in this "community" (the word used by the FA STAFF ON THE TELEPHONE TODAY) even commented on the substance of the FACTS about these altered flight tracks on these particular days?4. Why are my comments the only ones that I can find that have been "down voted"? 5. Why was I told by FA employees today that they can log into customers accounts, and that might explain why votes on these posts appear as difficult to explain or why votes might be counted that I (we?) didn't actually vote?6. Why was the data from the MH17 series of flights about 75% complete guesswork NOW, one day after many many stories quoting information from this website were used as expected....as factual.....is that thought-provoking, concerning or disturbing to anyone on this site?7. Wll this comment also get down-voted, and why?

All of that seems very odd to me, and as a brand new poster, I sincerely would appreciate some explanations that come from you or anyone else who wants to discuss facts, and serious issues, not generalities and accusations or personal attacks.

Mark, I clicked on your account name and found you have been a member for seven year, and that this is the first time you have posted.

I will try to answer your questions from my perspective. Mind you this is just MHO, and does not reflect anything else.

Your post:

1. Why all my comments about changes in factual data reports on flight aware have been "down voted" or removed or buried so they can't be found on this site without extraordinary efforts.

- you posted the same exact lengthy message several times in multiple squawks. This appeared to me somewhat odd in the least. I personally down voted them because of the multiple postings as a manner of negative feedback. If a post has an aggregate vote tally of -10, it is dropped from viewing with the option for someone to click on it to see what it said. I clicked on one of yours that had that action taken only to discover it was the duplicated post.

2. What is the problem with asking questions?- absolutely nothing, in general.

3. Why has No One in this "community" (the word used by the FA STAFF ON THE TELEPHONE TODAY) even commented on the substance of the FACTS about these altered flight tracks on these particular days?- It is the luck of the draw. What kind of comments were you expecting. I did comment on one post, it may have been yours or another's about MH17 route changing over time- I did not understand whether the referred changes were between days or if the data on one particular flight changed between views.

4. Why are my comments the only ones that I can find that have been "down voted"?- Your ox got gored this time. It has happened to others on various squawks.

5. Why was I told by FA employees today that they can log into customers accounts, and that might explain why votes on these posts appear as difficult to explain or why votes might be counted that I (we?) didn't actually vote?- I don't have a clue what you were told nor why. Are you suggesting that FA staff log onto accounts to 'phantom vote'? I've found that if I vote upvote something once, the count goes from N to N+1, if I vote again, it goes from M to M-1. Maybe admin override works differently. IMHO, FA staff are too busy to bother with such trivial things as voting on a person's squawk post.

6. Why was the data from the MH17 series of flights about 75% complete guesswork NOW, one day after many many stories quoting information from this website were used as expected....as factual.....is that thought-provoking, concerning or disturbing to anyone on this site?- Good question. Pick any subject, find the root source document, then compare the variety or reporting nuances that spread out from there. I'd attribute it to a) misinterpretation, b) wild speculation, and c) just piss-poor reporting practices on a global basis.

7. Wll this comment also get down-voted, and why?- Referring to the post to which I am replying, probably. Just because the whims of voters. My relpy- anyone' guess.

Bottom line on your original post: I really could not understand clearly the point you were trying to make about with data you posted. yours, joel

Hey dude I hate to break it to you, but your link to the MAS17 flight is on the wrong day -- it was on the 17th, your link is to the 14th. I don't want to be a jerk but I seriously think you might need to take some time off and make sure you're OK on the basics (food, water, sleep, meds, etc).

If you take two minutes and click on that link you will see a screenshot of the flight path from the MH17 that took place on the 14th that clearly goes far south of the crash site AS REPORTED TWO OR THREE DAYS AGO ON FA. This southerly route was consistently reported for at least 4 or 10 or more MH17 flight days before 7 17 2014, according to FAs website. Also you will see the rationale for dependence on FACTS AND DATA in unraveling a crime. When that data changes, as it has on this site, other kinds of investigations must and should be initiated.

If you only have 30 seconds, click on this link from that story, and look at the map from the 14th flight date:

That picture is the actual route taken by MH17 on the 14th, according to FAs reporting service, in the Russian language. Flight aware never suggested any "problems" in their data three days ago when they illustrated that path for MH17 on their site for the flight on 7 14 2014, or any other flight. UNTIL TODAY.

That was the story BEFORE TODAY.

THIS IS THE STORY NOW:

"Of course, it's still important to understand that the white line reflects a lack of data and you can't draw any conclusions from it, since it may suggest that, for example, a flight flew through a country that it really deviated around. We are constantly working to improve our coverage and more data sources are added almost daily."

This is the approximate or assumed or "duck on the pond" route that we have now that FA has changed their storyline:

Before today, NONE OF MH17 tracks reported by FA (except the one that crashed on the 17th) went over the "war zone...NOW, today, they all do....why?

Why does this matter?

Because if FA actually has no idea where planes are most of the time and place, what is the point wasting time on their data anyway? Are we going to get yet another story next week or next month?

Even if you don't think there is any relevance to accuracy or consistency, transparency or disclosure, pilots, sailors, and generally honest people believe there is. In fact, world opinion and events are turning on assumptions made about FACTS. Facts declared, then altered. Facts about flight MH17 before AND on the 17th of July. Facts that would never have been revealed as assumptions, guesses, presumptions, or maybe just plain bovine feces, had it not been brought to the attention of FA this AM, and posted repeatedly until the "current explanation" of the "data" and "map behavior" was finally revealed today mid-afternoon today.

As bad as that sounds, I would have stopped short of describing FA methods and data as "I'd attribute it to a) misinterpretation, b) wild speculation, and c) just piss-poor reporting practices on a global basis." (Joel's answer to my Question 6 above about FAs changing, incomplete story.)

I couldn't have said it myself but there you go. Obviously, as of today, at least 75% of the flight path data is uncertain in most, if not all of the MH17 flights as reported by FA AS OF NOW.

Does it make you feel better to know that now we all know that FA really is extrapolating the vast majority of their flight data, at least in these crucial flights, or to now know that "we really have no idea" where the planes are, is better than being lied to up til today?

I appreciate your concern about my health and diet. Since that is a personal attack, I suppose someone ought to give you a thumbs down, but I won't.

I would rather give you a small collection of links to people who are thinking clearly enough, and whose attention spans are sufficient to work diligently to discern fact from fiction, explanations from cover-ups, and excuses from lies. These links ought to give you some food for thought about why facts matter, and why changing a map doesn't change the truth, just the perception of reality. It can also alter the perception of a company.

Your point"Does it make you feel better to know that now we all know that FA really is extrapolating the vast majority of their flight data, at least in these crucial flights, or to now know that "we really have no idea" where the planes are, is better than being lied to up til today? " is a good one. FA has always acknowledged that some data and datapoints outside their service area are interpolated. Up to the point of impact on MH17 this was not considered significant. Their response appears to have been to reprogram the display so that hard data is displayed differently than interpolated data. That they did not do so before this incident IMHO is a sin of omission rather than commission.

From FA FAQs"Tracking Data

How does FlightAware handle flights around the world? What is FlightAware's service area? (Back to top)FlightAware's primary service area includes airspace operated by the United States (including Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto RIco, and Guam), Canada, the Caribbean, Australia, the United Kingdom, and France. Flights in the primary service area support real time maps, departure and arrival information, delays, and more.

FlightAware's secondary service covers scheduled major airline operations at any airport in the world. Flights in the secondary service area support departure and arrival information. Secondary coverage areas may have real-time positions for ADS-B equipped aircraft operating in FlightAware's ADS-B coverage area. Additionally, some airlines send FlightAware satellite position reports from aircraft worldwide that augments other position data and provides transoceanic coverage as well.

For flights arriving in a service area from outside of a service area, FlightAware will be able to track the flight when it nears a service area. For flights departing a service area, FlightAware will be able to track the flight until it leaves the coverage area. Flights may not be tracked beyond that point unless they enter another service area.

Not all worldwide data sources (e.g., European data, datalink ARINC/SITA ACARS, etc) are freely available on FlightAware.com due to government regulations or commercial arrangements. You can contact us if you have a commercial need for worldwide data."

The above quote may need to be updated in the light of recent changes.

I must respectfully disagree with your assertion "In fact, world opinion and events are turning on assumptions made about FACTS." I believe that opinion and events are turning on assumptions made by other assumptions, innuendo, prevarications, and entities (governmental and nongovernmental) spinning the story to their personal benefit.

If you wish to continue this conversation with me, may I suggest you send me a PM via the discussion board.

And, I don't think the Chip's comment improved the general signal-to-noise ratio.